NEW YORK, Feb. 12, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that class action lawsuits have commenced on behalf of shareholders of the following publicly-traded companies. Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff have until the deadlines listed to petition the court and further details about the cases can be found at the links provided. There is no cost or obligation to you.

The filed complaint alleges that the Registration Statement made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) there was a flaw and/or quality issue with Arlo’s newly designed battery for its Ultra camera systems; (ii) this flaw and/or quality issue with the Ultra battery could result in a shipping delay of Arlo’s Ultra product; (iii) such a shipping delay endangered Arlo’s chances of launching the Ultra product in time for the crucial holiday season; (iv) such a shipping delay would allow Arlo’s competitors to capitalize on the Ultra product’s missed launch, thereby increasing their own market share; (v) Arlo’s consumers had been experiencing battery drain issues and other battery-related issues in connection with recent firmware updates; (vi) because of the foregoing, Arlo’s fourth quarter 2018 results and consumer base would be negatively impacted; and (vii) as a result, Arlo’s Registration Statement was materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

Sogou Inc. (NYSE: SOGO) Class Period: Purchasers of American Depositary Shares pursuant and/or traceable to Sogou’s false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the Company’s initial public offering on November 9, 2017 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 11, 2019 Join the action: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/sogou-inc-loss-form?wire=3

About the lawsuit: Sogou Inc. allegedly made materially false and/or misleading statements during the class period and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Chinese regulators were analyzing Sogou for regulatory action because of an increase in Sogou merchants’ sales of counterfeit goods; (ii) Chinese regulators were analyzing Sogou for regulatory action because Sogou’s existing software, advertising procedures, personnel, and audit procedures were insufficient to safeguard against compliance violations with governing Chinese regulations, and would need to be updated, enhanced, and strengthened, thus resulting in increased expenses; (iii) Sogou’s cost of revenues were skyrocketing primarily because of significant increases in Traffic Acquisition Cost, which is a primary driver of Sogou’s cost of revenues, as Sogou was dealing with significant price inflation from increased competition; (iv) Sogou was going to alter its strategy concerning smart hardware and push the Company’s AI capabilities to increase product competitiveness; (v) as a result of altering its smart hardware strategy, Sogou had already decided to phase out non-AI-enabled hardware products, such as legacy models of Teemo Smart Watch, and transition to use products integrating AI technologies, which Sogou hoped would reduce its hardware revenue in the second half of 2018; and (vi) as a result of the foregoing, Sogou’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

About the lawsuit: Throughout the class period, Immunomedics, Inc. allegedly made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Immunomedics’ Morris Plains, New Jersey drug substance manufacturing facility was not in compliance with FDA requirements; (ii) the Company’s Quality Control Unit did not possess the authority to investigate and correct critical FDA violations occurring at the Morris Plains, New Jersey facility; (iii) the Company suffered a February 2018 data integrity breach at the Morris Plains, New Jersey facility which, among other issues, included the backdating records and manipulation of bioburden samples; (iv) the Company’s Chemistry, Manufacturing and Control data submitted in connection with its BLA for sacituzumab govitecan was insufficient to support FDA approval; and (v) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

About the lawsuit: Allergan plc allegedly made materially false and/or misleading statements during the class period and/or failed to disclose that: (i) textured breast implants manufactured by Allergan were linked to ALCL; (ii) the foregoing link to cancer, when revealed, would foreseeably force Allergan to recall those textured breast implants from the market; and (iii) as a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines to request the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn’t require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Levi & Korsinsky is a national firm with offices in New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm’s attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT:Levi & Korsinsky, LLPJoseph E. Levi, Esq.55 Broadway, 10th FloorNew York, NY 10006 jlevi@levikorsinsky.com Tel: (212) 363-7500Toll Free: (877) 363-5972Fax: (212) 363-7171 www.zlk.com